Understanding the controversy surrounding the collapsed China spy case

The British government is under pressure following the unexpected dismissal of charges against two men accused of spying for China, just weeks before their trial was due. Prosecutors dropped the case in September, triggering a political debate over accountability.

Background of the Case

Christopher Cash, a former parliamentary researcher, and Christopher Berry, an academic, were charged in April 2024 under the Official Secrets Act. Authorities accused them of gathering and transmitting sensitive information that could threaten national security between December 2021 and February 2023. Both men have consistently denied the allegations.

The prosecution claimed that the information was passed to a Chinese intelligence operative and then to a senior Chinese Communist Party official.

Reason for Case Collapse

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) stated that the case could not proceed because necessary evidence from the government was unavailable, specifically regarding China's designation as a national security threat. Director of Public Prosecutions Stephen Parkinson explained that while evidence existed when charges were filed, a legal precedent required China to have been formally recognized as a threat during the period of the alleged offenses.

Some legal analysts questioned whether this evidence was truly essential for prosecution.

Political Reactions

Downing Street emphasized that the decision to drop charges was made solely by the CPS, without ministerial involvement. Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer redirected attention to the prior Conservative administration, noting that the prosecution had to reflect the governments stance at the time, when China was not officially designated a threat.

Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch countered, citing examples of Tory ministers labeling China as a security threat. Former security and legal officials also challenged the governments explanation, suggesting that restrictions on evidence may have affected the case. Accusations arose that national security adviser Jonathan Powell might have influenced proceedings, which the government denied.

Evidence and Witness Statements

Deputy national security adviser Matthew Collins submitted witness statements independently, describing China as a major state-based threat to UK economic security and detailing its espionage activities. The statements emphasized cooperation with China where possible, competition where necessary, and security challenges where required. Critics argued that the language mirrored Labours 2024 manifesto, raising questions about potential influence.

Oversight and Committee Findings

The Joint Committee on the National Security Strategy (JCNSS) highlighted systemic issues, though it found no evidence of deliberate sabotage. The committee noted "confusion and misaligned expectations" in handling sensitive cases and recommended formalized processes between the Cabinet Office, security services, and CPS to prevent similar issues.

Implications for the Government

Since taking office, Labour has aimed to strengthen trade ties with China while safeguarding national security. Prime Minister Starmer criticized inconsistent policies of previous Conservative governments and emphasized a balanced approachprotecting security while pursuing economic opportunities. Recent MI5 alerts indicated Chinese espionage attempts targeting MPs, though the Chinese embassy dismissed these claims. The government is also expected to approve a new Chinese embassy near critical data infrastructure, a decision postponed to January 20, 2026.

Author: Sophia Brooks